Close Print

SBN and or Panel will be breaking the law by holding a hearing

tomorrow in violation of SCR 105(2)(c) proof attached
From: Zach Coughlin (zachcoughlin@hotmail.com)
Sent: Tue 11/13/12 3:22 PM
To: skent@skentlaw.com (skent@skentlaw.com); mike@tahoelawyer.com (mike@tahoelawyer.com);
nevtelassn@sbcglobal.net (nevtelassn@sbcglobal.net); patrickk@nvbar.org (patrickk@nvbar.org);
fflaherty@dlpfd.com (fflaherty@dlpfd.com); davidc@nvbar.org (davidc@nvbar.org);
complaints@nvbar.org (complaints@nvbar.org); tsusich@nvdetr.org (tsusich@nvdetr.org);
je@eloreno.com (je@eloreno.com); cvellis@bhfs.com (cvellis@bhfs.com); eifert.nta@att.net
(eifert.nta@att.net); rosec@nvbar.org (rosec@nvbar.org)
You will be criminals as of tomorrow if you hold that hearing.
SCR 105(2)(c), SBN"s Index for Hearing is holding out certificates of mailing and or
proofs of service on the most materials documents incident to a due process analysis
(10 9 12 Notice of Intent to Take Default was recieved as returned due to insufficient
postage by the SBN on 11 8 12, I declare under penalty of perjury...nrs 53.045...further,
SBN only sent one envelope of that document, that returned for insufficient postage
certified mail mailing on 10 9 12.
Additionally, SBN is holding out 10 12 2012 certified mailing of Notice of Hearing and
Designation of Witnesses and Summary of Evidence as having a date of 10/12/12 for a
constructive notice analysis, despite the USPS proof indicating the first scan in a USPS
system occurred on 10/16/12.
Additionaly, the SBN and Peters formally declared that the 8/23/12 mailing was
returned to the SBN and that another certified mailing of the Complaint would
immediately be sent out, and that the 8/23/12 certified mailing would never be offered
to prove proof of service under SCR 109 or in any other manner offered as proof of
service of the Complaint. Yet that is just what King has done by his Index putting
that forward.
Sincerely,
Zach Coughlin
1471 E. 9th St.
Reno, NV 89512
Tel and Fax: 949 667 7402
ZachCoughlin@hotmail.com
Zach has a file to share with you on SkyDrive. To view it, click the link below.
11 13 14 attachment proving 0204 sbn and panel fraud scr 105(2)(c).pdf
From: zachcoughlin@hotmail.com
To: skent@skentlaw.com; mike@tahoelawyer.com; nevtelassn@sbcglobal.net; patrickk@nvbar.org;
fflaherty@dlpfd.com; davidc@nvbar.org; complaints@nvbar.org; tsusich@nvdetr.org; je@eloreno.com;
cvellis@bhfs.com
Subject: FW:
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2012 07:50:13 -0800
Nice to see my friend Steve back in the game. And the SBN stipping to a dismissal of its SCR
116 appeal rights...
Please find attached the file stamped versions of the 10 31 12 subpoena duces tecum for which SBN
Laura Peters signed a waiver of service or similar
and the 10 31 12 Pre Hearing Motion to Dismiss Summary J udgment/Memorandum of Law
(Response)

Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 11:28:12 -0700
From: silverman@silverman-decaria.com
To: zachcoughlin@hotmail.com
Subject: re: FW: please find enclosed my Petition under SCR 102(4)(d) and SCR111(7)
I think this is waaaaay too complex and detailed. Give them a procedural history and whether there is a final
judgment in the crim case and point out that your temporary suspension is akin to a permanent death of your
practice. Or, if true, say you fucked up and/or were fucked up from lack of drugs and you are sorry and you now
have access to your meds and are ok. I can't think this pleading is going to help you much...it is too long,
repetitive and does not seem to deal with why the temp suspension is sijmply wrong or harsh. If you can't make
your case in 3-5 pp, you can't make your case in 35. You do seem to be a good lawyer, however. At bottom, Steve
Harris took hundreds of thousands of dollars and had no temp suspension; you stole a candy bar (at worst). WTF.
Zach Coughlin
1471 E. 9th St.
Reno, NV 89512
Tel and Fax: 949 667 7402
ZachCoughlin@hotmail.com

City Attorney Skau, updated discovery in iPhone case, dispatch
recordings, don't seem to reveal basis for "a possible fight" assertions in
office testimony and prosecutors's filings and argument
From: Zach Coughlin (zachcoughlin@hotmail.com)
Sent: Wed 11/14/12 2:09 AM
To: zyoung@da.washoecounty.us (zyoung@da.washoecounty.us); skent@skentlaw.com
(skent@skentlaw.com); mike@tahoelawyer.com (mike@tahoelawyer.com); nevtelassn@sbcglobal.net
(nevtelassn@sbcglobal.net); patrickk@nvbar.org (patrickk@nvbar.org); fflaherty@dlpfd.com
(fflaherty@dlpfd.com); davidc@nvbar.org (davidc@nvbar.org); complaints@nvbar.org
(complaints@nvbar.org); tsusich@nvdetr.org (tsusich@nvdetr.org); je@eloreno.com (je@eloreno.com);
cvellis@bhfs.com (cvellis@bhfs.com); eifert.nta@att.net (eifert.nta@att.net); rhrc@laketahoelaw.com
(consult@laketahoelaw.com); stuttle@washoecounty.us (stuttle@washoecounty.us); kadlicj@reno.gov
(kadlicj@reno.gov); wongd@reno.gov (wongd@reno.gov); schornsby@nvdetr.org
(schornsby@nvdetr.org); jleslie@washoecounty.us (jleslie@washoecounty.us);
jgoodnight@washoecounty.us (jgoodnight@washoecounty.us); jbosler@washoecounty.us
(jbosler@washoecounty.us)
Dear DDA Young and Bar Counsel and Panel Members,
The prosecution in RCR2011-063341 and the associated arrest on 8/20/11 is what
started all this off (by "all this" I mean the 46 days in jail, the 10 different trips to jail,
the five to six different evictions, all summary, the competency evaluations, and all the
associated grievances. This arrest and prosecution have largely been based on and
the office and prosecutor have cited to, their contention that the information from
ECOMM or dispatch told the RPD Officers (and the arresting Officer Nick Duralde is
married to a dispatcher working that night and perhaps whose voice is on these files,
finally given to me only today, by Reno City Attorney's Office Creighton Skau, after he
secured my attendance at a hearing that I do not believe was noticed in a legal since by
sending me an email saying J udge Sferrazza authorized service of the notice of the
hearing by email...which J udge Sferrazza denies (in fairness to Mr. Skau...its possible
the J udge did say that...Mr. Young could maybe shed some light on that, as apparently
their was a sort of group meeting with he, the Reno City Attorney and the WCPD on or
about November 8th, 2012 in rCR2012-063342, that I was not noticed on and, of
course did not attend).
Anyways, DDA Young and Officer Duralde have constantly harped on how dispatch
reported a "possible fight" and how that somehow justified the rash approach taken
by Officer Duralde, the overcharging of "oooh, that's a felony" Felony Grand
Larceny (7 days in jail, the eviction notice in the Richard Hills summary eviction from
my former home law office was served during the interim in RJ C Rev2011-001708) for
a three year old iphone that the alleged owner, Cory Goble, testified was worth about
$80 at the time....(and the overcharging of a felony enabled Officer Duralde to conduct
a search incident to arrest for a misdemeanor not committed in his presence, after 7
pm...which Nevada law prohibits, particularly where, as here, there was no citizen's
arrest (Coughlin himself called 911 and there is a video of the time prior to arrest
where Coughlin is heard imploring the skater youths to stay peaceful and wait for law
enforcement to arrive so a civil resolution of the dispute could be garnered).
I am writing now and providing this new production of ECOMM/911 dispatch
recordings that would seem to be the State's last hope of proving that the Officers were
told of, by dispatch, "a possible fight" and therein provide some factual basis for that
which Officer Duralde and DDA Young have testified to, and filed pleadings in that
matter arguing that reports of "a possible fight" justified the subsequent terry stop
weapons check pat down, and search incident to arrest (remember, Officer Duralde
announced 20 seconds into arriving on scene that he was going to arrest Coughlin and
do a search of Coughlin's pockets prior to conducting any of the pretexutal
"investigation" that he later testified to...its just that Officer Duralde did not realize he
was being recorded when he said that....no matter how he "remixed" things in his
Supplementary Declaration (filed within 48 hours of arrest) or his Narrative (by all
indications, the Narrative was only filed some three months after the arrest and
apparently after the RPD and City Attorneys Office became aware that the video of the
arrest was publicly available).
I have listened closely to these dispatch recordings and hear nothing about "a possible
fight". Does that make the Officer's Testimony perjury and DDA Young's conduct
misconduct? DDA Young, I have a Hearing in a few hours on 11/14/12 at the SBN's
Office on Double R. Blvd. I ask that you attend and explain these matters as this
arrest is pled in Bar Counsel Kings SCR 105 Complaint.
Mr. Leslie and Mr. Goodnight, I ask that you attend and explain your failure to
subpoena the dispatch recordings until October 3, 2012 (despite the Trial occuring on
May 7th, 2012 (in violation of NRS 178.405, no less), and again on J uly 16th,
2012....and, again on August 29th, and September 5th, 2012....and then please explain
why you feigned inability to personally serve subpoenas as a basis for failing to get
Nicole Watson (easily found and or served via a certified mailing under NRS 174.345,
at the addresses your investigator refused to turn over to me until November 2012 upon
a court order (you guys are supposed to help defend the accused, not the County or
local law enforcement against their potential civil liability for ego driven foolish
arrests) as a student at McQueen High School along with Lucy Byington, both
percipient witnesses, and where Watson was captured on tape admitting to the "man
with a six-pack" holding the phone aloft and offering it up, and announcing, very
loudly, that he woud "throw it in the river" if it was not immediately claimed (therein
presenting yet another claim of right defense and further vitiating the legitimacy of
DDA Young's retaliatory, deficiently pled, amending of the Complaint on December
5th, 2012 to included "possessing or receiving stolen property from another".
I ask that in inquiry into the propriety of Mr. Skau's email attached (wherein the City
Attorney's gained an advantage and prejudiced my ability to defend in both NG12-
0204, etc. (the Bar Hearing) and the petty larceny Trial (in RCR2011-063341). I will
note that at least J oe Goodnight gathered the three 911 calls.
Sincerely,
Zach Coughlin
1471 E. 9th St.
Reno, NV 89512
Tel and Fax: 949 667 7402
ZachCoughlin@hotmail.com
Zach has 66 files to share with you on SkyDrive. To view them, click the links below.
PHONE CALL Start_Time = Saturday, August 20, 2011 11-22-52 PM Source_ID = 50.wav
PRIMARY RADIO TRAFFIC Start_Time = Saturday, August 20, 2011 11-22-45 PM Source_ID = 44.wav
PRIMARY RADIO TRAFFIC Start_Time = Saturday, August 20, 2011 11-22-52 PM Source_ID = 1.wav
PRIMARY RADIO TRAFFIC Start_Time = Saturday, August 20, 2011 11-23-49 PM Source_ID = 31.wav
PRIMARY RADIO TRAFFIC Start_Time = Saturday, August 20, 2011 11-23-55 PM Source_ID = 34.wav
PRIMARY RADIO TRAFFIC Start_Time = Saturday, August 20, 2011 11-24-00 PM Source_ID = 36.wav
PRIMARY RADIO TRAFFIC Start_Time = Saturday, August 20, 2011 11-24-06 PM Source_ID = 38.wav
PRIMARY RADIO TRAFFIC Start_Time = Saturday, August 20, 2011 11-24-11 PM Source_ID = 39.wav
PRIMARY RADIO TRAFFIC Start_Time = Saturday, August 20, 2011 11-24-29 PM Source_ID = 43.wav
PRIMARY RADIO TRAFFIC Start_Time = Saturday, August 20, 2011 11-24-34 PM Source_ID = 46.wav
PRIMARY RADIO TRAFFIC Start_Time = Saturday, August 20, 2011 11-25-06 PM Source_ID = 13.wav
new Discovery finally produced by Reno City attorney on 1/12/12
Jaywalking arrest in SCR 105 Complaint
PRIMARY RADIO TRAFFIC Start_Time = Saturday, August 20, 2011 11-25-22 PM Source_ID = 21.wav
Start_Time = Saturday, August 20, 2011 11-23-55 PM Source_ID = 34.wav
PRIMARY RADIO TRAFFIC Start_Time = Saturday, August 20, 2011 11-26-30 PM Source_ID = 12.wav
PRIMARY RADIO TRAFFIC Start_Time = Saturday, August 20, 2011 11-26-34 PM Source_ID = 14.wav
PRIMARY RADIO TRAFFIC Start_Time = Saturday, August 20, 2011 11-27-25 PM Source_ID = 41.wav
PRIMARY RADIO TRAFFIC Start_Time = Saturday, August 20, 2011 11-27-29 PM Source_ID = 43.wav
PRIMARY RADIO TRAFFIC Start_Time = Saturday, August 20, 2011 11-28-11 PM Source_ID = 17.wav
PRIMARY RADIO TRAFFIC Start_Time = Saturday, August 20, 2011 11-28-17 PM Source_ID = 18.wav
PRIMARY RADIO TRAFFIC Start_Time = Sunday, August 21, 2011 12-08-40 AM Source_ID = 17.wav
Download all

From: Zach Coughlin (zachcoughlin@hotmail.com)
Sent: Wed 11/14/12 6:46 AM
To: (skent@skentlaw.com) (skent@skentlaw.com); (mike@tahoelawyer.com) (mike@tahoelawyer.com);
(nevtelassn@sbcglobal.net) (nevtelassn@sbcglobal.net); (patrickk@nvbar.org) (patrickk@nvbar.org);
(fflaherty@dlpfd.com) (fflaherty@dlpfd.com); (davidc@nvbar.org) (davidc@nvbar.org);
(complaints@nvbar.org) (complaints@nvbar.org); (tsusich@nvdetr.org) (tsusich@nvdetr.org);
(je@eloreno.com) (je@eloreno.com); (cvellis@bhfs.com) (cvellis@bhfs.com); (eifert.nta@att.net)
(eifert.nta@att.net); (consult@laketahoelaw.com) (rhrc@laketahoelaw.com); (stuttle@washoecounty.us)
(stuttle@washoecounty.us); (kadlicj@reno.gov) (kadlicj@reno.gov); (wongd@reno.gov)
(wongd@reno.gov); (schornsby@nvdetr.org) (schornsby@nvdetr.org)
Dear Panel and Bar Counsel,
Please find the attach additional discovery the Reno City Attorney's Office gave me
today related to the custodial jaywalking arrest of 1/12/12, at which time Richard Hill
applied for an received a TPO from RJ C J udge Schroeder in 40 minutes (and RPD
Officer Look took a special trip to the jail to attempt to serve the TPO for Hill).
Please see attached the video of the arrest and interactions prior thereto, and consider
the lack of accuracy in Hill and Baker's Second Motion to Show Cause, J udge
Flanagans denying that Motion incident to a 3/23/12 and 3/29/12 Order to Show Cause
Hearing (which WCSO Deputy Machen, the same one who filed a false affidavit
incident to the summary eviction order posting and lockout on 11/1/11 in the Richard
Hill eviction cases rev2011-001708 served on Coughlin, by way of violating the
"courthouse sanctuary" doctrine, and Caplow holds attorney of record and efiler on that
case Coughlin did not require personal service anyways...this was hazing by Hill and
the RMC Marshals and WCSO Deputies, plain and simple, at the 2/27/12 Trial in 11
TR 26800, the traffic citation trial that NG12-0204 stems from, which stems from RPD
Sargent Tarter telling Coughlin to leave Hill's office upon going there after being
released from a 3 day custodial arrest incident to Hill and Merliss's lies on 11/13/12
resulting in a wrongful arrest for criminal trespass of Coughlin by RPD Officer Chris
Carter and Sargent Marcia Lopez). In the video Hill is see and heard lying to Officer
Hollingsworth in seeking to abuse process and have Coughlin arrested. Then trainee
Officer Leedy then proceeds to adopt Hill's approach nearly verbatim in his arrest
report. Sargent Sifre (whom arrested Coughlin again two days later on 1/14/12 for
"misuse of 911" which DDA Young nows seeks to amend to a crime that will leverage
the "serious offense" dictates of SCR 111, even though he lacks an RPC 3.8 probable
cause basis for doing so. Further, both Hill and Officer Leedy substantially
misrepresent what Officer Hollingsworth said. Additionally, should Officer
Hollingsworth had indeed told Coughlin that what he was doing was legal but that the
Officer was ordering Coughlin not to do it, or threatening Coughlin in order to achieve
cooperation, that would violate Soldal v. Cook County, which is essentially what RPD
Sargent Tarter did on 11/15/11 in his three traffic citations outside Hill's office, which
les to 11 tr 26800, which begat ng12-0434, and, arguably ng12-0435. I guess it takes
a lot of people to help Board member Richard G. Hill, Esq. and his fled-to-Kentucky
associate Casey Baker, Esq. make money...One can hardly blame Coughlin for half-
way believing RPD Officer Carter's statement on 11/15/11 that "Richard G. Hill pays
me a lot of money so I do what he says to and I arrest who he says to...". Coughlin's
merely attributing the statement that RPD Carter said to Carter is not misconduct.
Hill's making up things about a "crack pipe and bag of weed" and "large quantity of
pills" (see the video "Zach's arrest 014 that Hill and Merliss themselves filmed to see
that the "pills" are vitamins...and Hill's contractor Phil Stewart, signed an affidavit that
mentions this "large quantity of pills"). If you knew all the Thursday nights I spent
since 2003 with Coe, and now deceased J udge Bob, and so many others, you would
realize how infinitely tacky Hill's conduct is.
Sincerely,
Zach Coughlin
1471 E. 9th St.
Reno, NV 89512
Tel and Fax: 949 667 7402
ZachCoughlin@hotmail.com
Zach has 14 files to share with you on SkyDrive. To view them, click the links below.
1 12 12 audio of RPD Officer Leedy 12 cr 00696 rmc jaywalking arrest 1708 26405 03628 000018.cda
7 3 12 redacted disturbing the peace arrest 12 cr 12420 rmc loomis sotelo mauser weaver dye 00696 26800 sbn 0204
25 page discovery northwind ncs krebs reduced size.pdf
1 14 12 bf additional discovery 12 cr 00696 jaywalking arrest Richard Hill's lies led to RPD RMC RJC TPO rcp2012-
000018 0204 Leed.pdf
SAM_0190_mpeg4 rpd hill sifre jaywalking 11 cr 26405 11 tr 26800 rmc.mp4
SAM_0189_mpeg4 rpd hill sifre jaywalking 11 cr 26405 11 tr 26800 rmc.mp4
rcp 2012-000018 D3 Hill v Coughlin Protection Order smaller nuanced.pdf
1 20 12 WDC APPEAL RICHARD HILL 2ND MOTION TO SHOW CAUSE.pdf
4 20 12 1708 0204 exhibits 1 to 4 of Hills motion for attorney's fees cv11-03628.pdf
11 9 12 61901 amendment to opposition.pdf
11 5 12 000374 notice that noa was not file stamped motion for new trial or to set aside order kern king schroeder
ptthoa 0204.pdf
10 29 12 notice of errata and SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL 26405 1708 26800 0650630.pdf
bifurcate atty client severe hearing trialotjl.pdf
bifurcate atty client severe hearing trial.pdf
CV11-03628 ENTIRE EFLEX COMBINED FOR APPENDIX IN 60331 AND 61383 COUGHLIN V MERLISS 26406 1708 26800
NG12-0204 BF.pdf
Download all